Should Boulder City Council members disclose their relationship before voting for a friend to serve on a city board or commission?

Do free tickets to University of Colorado football games constitute gifts or an opportunity to network on behalf of the city?

Should the city attorney with the power to grant council members immunity from potential conflict-of-interest charges be the same person who investigates such accusations?

Those are some of the questions the Boulder City Council will be talking about as the council members consider revising their conflict-of-interest, ethics and financial disclosure ordinances.

Tuesday's study session will be the first of two on the topic. The issue has come to the forefront both at the urging of Mayor Matt Appelbaum, who has long said the rules are confusing and occasionally too narrow, and as a result of questions raised by some members of the public about council members' financial disclosures and votes for friends to serve on city boards.

Advertisement

A follow-up discussion is scheduled for the next study session on Oct. 23.

Any recommended ordinance changes that come out of the study sessions would have to come back to the City Council for first and second readings and a public hearing.

Among the topics up for discussion are what constitutes a "substantial interest in a transaction," how to define an "appearance of impropriety" and whether council members should disclose the thought process they go through to make ethical decisions, even when they ultimately decide not to recuse themselves.

They'll also discuss the city's gift policy, the role of the city attorney and the financial reporting requirements.

"The public needs to trust that government officials are not taking advantage of their position," Carr said. "They also provide guidance on what's OK and what isn't."

The current rules tend to be narrow in scope. Council members cannot vote on and must recuse themselves from discussions about projects in which they have a controlling financial interest, as well as those for which they would be within the official notification radius. They are also supposed to recuse themselves in situations that could create an "appearance of impropriety."

Carr said the existing rules don't encompass everything that might be of concern to the public.

"You could be 550 feet from project you don't care about at all and have to recuse yourself, but there could be a project where your best friend is the contractor or the architect and you don't," he said. "Boulder is a small town, and those kinds of things undermine trust."

At the same time, writing rules that account for every possible situation can be difficult, Carr said.

In recent months, some council members have been criticized for voting for friends or business associates for certain volunteer boards and commissions. Because a board appointment isn't a transaction, the ethics rules don't prohibit it.

Carr said he doesn't necessarily see a conflict with an appointment to a volunteer board, but it would be good for the City Council to openly discuss what the city's policy should be. One option is to ask council members to disclose such relationships but not necessarily recuse themselves.

Councilwoman K.C. Becker, who was blasted by council critic Seth Brigham for not disclosing her relationship with a friend and business partner appointed to the Boulder Housing Partners board, said she looks forward to the discussion.

Housing authority board members are appointed by the mayor, not by a council vote, and Becker has pointed out that people who apply for boards and commissions and people who serve on the City Council often move in the same circles.

She said an open debate will help resolve some of the questions about where the line is.

"The rules need some clarity to them," she said.

Councilman Macon Cowles said he would like to see more public involvement in the discussion so that residents could tell the council what information they feel they need to know.

That said, Cowles said he doesn't believe it's practical or appropriate for council members to recuse themselves from board and commission appointments just because they know an applicant.

"These are thankless positions, and we're lucky that we have people who are willing to step forward and do it," he said. "You're not appointing them to something that will benefit them financially. You're appointing them to something that is going to take a chunk out of their personal life."

Council members are also not allowed to accept gifts unless they are under $50. Carr said this frequently becomes an issue around offers of tickets to CU football games.

City Council members are sometimes invited to attend receptions with university officials and watch the game from a box. When they don't accept in order to comply with the ethics rules, that can be interpreted as not caring about the university, Carr said.

"Are they building the city's relationship with CU if they go?" Carr asked. "Is it council business to network with the university?"

Colorado Ethics Watch Director Luis Toro said his organization is following Boulder's process as part of a survey it's doing of home rule cities' ethics standards.

"Boulder has a long history of caring about ethics, and that's good," he said. "They're asking the right questions."

He said Boulder should consider removing criminal sanctions for ethics violations. Having such sanctions is common and may be appropriate in the most extreme cases, but they also mean that ethics guidelines have to be very specific to meet criminal standards of proof. That means they don't always encompass everything residents might want to know about their elected officials' connections.

"In ethics, sometimes you want things to be vague enough to cover a lot of situations," he said.

Toro said some cities, such as Denver and Colorado Springs, have independent ethics commissions that investigate accusations. Sanctions can be as mild as a letter of reprimand or as serious as referral for prosecution.

In Boulder, the city attorney is tasked with investigating allegations of impropriety. Yet, if a council member consults with the city attorney about a potential conflict, that council member has "immunity" from charges. Council members jokingly call it the "get-out-of-jail-free card."

Carr said he feels that he can play both roles with integrity, but it's worthwhile to discuss whether the roles should be separated.

Cowles said he likes the idea of an independent commission, especially because the city attorney is a direct employee of the City Council.

Toro said it's a common problem in home-rule cities that are not bound by state law and set their own rules. Some smaller cities resolve it simply by asking another town's attorney to investigate allegations.

Carr said he wants the city's regulations to be easy to understand and intuitive. They also need to walk the line between providing enough information to the public and not providing too many ways to politicize council members' relationships in the community.

"One of the challenges in my experience is that ethics challenges often have as much to do with political issues as actual ethical conflicts," said. "You want to get at the real purpose of the rules without undermining the entire system."

But Toro said political considerations don't matter as much as some politicians like to think.

"Anytime we file an ethics complaint against anyone, the first thing they say is, 'It's political,'" he said. "It gives the official a way to distract from their own behavior. I don't think that's a reason to limit the scope of ethics law. If an allegation is bogus, it's bogus. If it's legitimate, who cares what the motivation was?"

The Boulder alt-country band gives its EPs names such as Death and Resurrection, and its songs bear the mark of hard truths and sin. But the punk energy behind the playing, and the sense that it's all in good fun, make it OK to dance to a song like "Death." Full Story